The Climate Change Challenge: Implications for Tourism


Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
1 Comment
  • Entropy is the law of time and the infinite cycle of the universe also has to reach its breaking point, it has to be completely recycled so that a brand new cycle starts, again and again - See more at:
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The Climate Change Challenge: Implications for Tourism

  1. 1. The Climate Change ChallengeImplications for the Tourism Industry A Discussion Paper Anna Pollock, Co-founder The Icarus Foundation Helping Canada’s tourism sector be climate friendly November 2007
  2. 2. co n t e n t sSummary 3Introduction 6What is Climate Change? 9What Might Happen if Earth Continues to Warm? 11How Likely Is it That Such Warming Will Occur? 13What Steps Has the Global Community Taken to Address the Issue? 13What Actions Need Be Taken Now? 14Climate Change and Tourism – the Global Picture 14What is the Canadian Tourism Community Doing? 21What Should the Canadian Tourism Industry Do? 22Could the Tourism Industry Act as a Lead Change Agent? 26Endnotes 28
  3. 3. s U M M A RYThis paper serves two objectives:1. To summarize the key impacts of climate change on tourism as well as tourism’s contribution to global warming; and2. To encourage the Canadian tourism industry to develop effective and sustainable responses which might minimize the negative impacts of this phenomenon.The first part of the paper provides a layperson’s overview of the topic – those readerswho feel comfortable with the science and projected impacts may skip this section.The second part describes the direct and indirect impacts of climate change ontourism in general. We assert that failure to address the multiple risks associated withclimate change – be they physical, regulatory, financial, reputational or operational –will undermine Canada’s competitive position. Furthermore, failure to grasp howthe indirect effects of climate change (i.e., rising energy costs, changing consumerdemand, security issues, regulatory responses etc.) might also impede tourism’sgrowth and progress and could furthermore undermine its sustainability.The third part of the paper looks at the kinds of actions that need to be contemplatedif the tourism community is to play its part in responding effectively to climate change.While actions designed to mitigate and or adapt to the risks associated with climatechange are now occurring in several provinces, territories, and communities, thetourism sector, as a whole, has not yet articulated any robust and collective strategiesfor either reducing tourism’s ecological or carbon footprint or adapting to a verydifferent social and regulatory environment that is emerging within society at large.Even though the term sustainable has been in widespread use for over twentyyears, the evidence suggests that both tourism in particular, and human economiesin general, are not living within their ecological means. The tourism sector has notbeen required to internalize the external costs associated with its use of naturalresources i.e. the provision of clean air and water, the elimination or safe absorptionof greenhouse gases, and maintenance of natural ecosystems and pristinelandscapes. The rapid warming of earth’s average temperature, that will underminetourism activity in many locations, combined with growing evidence of ecologicalcollapse, suggest that this imbalance needs to be corrected.Climate change provides us with an opportunity to generate tangible and trulysustainable solutions to what is, in reality, an even broader environmental, socialand political challenge. The immediacy, urgency and unambiguous nature of thethreat is real. It can be measured. Targets can be set and progress monitored. s U M M A RY 3
  4. 4. Effective responses will involve collaboratively developing a complex range offiscal, regulatory, cultural and behavioral mechanisms that, if applied, would takeus a long way down the road to some form of sustainability. In other words, thebetter and more robust are our responses to climate change, the more likely we areto see a truly sustainable tourism sector emerge.The Icarus Foundation proposes a number of action steps that need to take placeat all levels – national, provincial/territorial and community-based as well as byindividual tourism suppliers. These include:1. Measuring the ecological and carbon footprint of tourism by region, sector and for each constituent parts so that baselines and realistic reduction targets can be set and reduction strategies devised;2. Understanding the issues and impacts with rigor and honesty;3. Committing to credible reduction and risk mitigation programs;4. Realizing the opportunities and benefits that come from adjusting to a low carbon economy;5. Re-thinking the kind of tourism we wish to develop that exists in better harmony and balance with the larger social and economic system of which it is a part. It is time to focus on the net value and benefit of tourism to all stakeholders and to focus on generating highest and best yields;6. Undertaking further research into changing consumer values and behaviors; the impediments to behavioral change; alternative policy instruments, actions of competitors; as well as the business and market opportunities that a low carbon economy presents;7. Helping the tourism industry adapt to the negative effects of a changing climate.Finally, the Icarus Foundation lays down a challenge to the tourism community inCanada. We believe that there is an opportunity for tourism to show leadership bypositioning itself as the stewards of the natural world that has been used so effectivelyto attract visitors. Canada could enjoy the same level of international recognitionand respect it gained as peacekeepers, if it were to make a deep commitment todeveloping a robust, resilient low carbon economy that lived within its environmentalmeans. Given that tourism is about helping people meet and engage with each otherwhile experiencing personal renewal, why shouldn’t tourism be the lead changeagent at this critical juncture in our human history? Canada’s tourism community– are you up for this exciting task? s U M M A RY 4
  5. 5. c A l l to Ac t i o nRather than create a new organization with associated overhead, we envisage theIcarus Foundation more as a virtual force that informs and shapes existing agencies.So we put these ideas out into the tourism community to stimulate discussion and,most importantly, ignite actions and share solutions.We encourage any and every reader to circulate the paper freely and encourage allreaders to:A. Send comments onto our blog – icarusblog/discussion-paper.html;B. Lobby their sector associations, destination marketing organizations and public sector agencies to put climate change high on their action agendas;C. Suggest creative solutions for action and community-wide engagement; andD. See themselves as potential change agents and leaders in their own community. s U M M A RY 5
  6. 6. i nt R o D U ct i o nOver the past year, awareness of and concern about the dangerous effects of rises inglobal average temperatures have gained significant ground throughout the globeand especially in Canada. New data from the Environmental Monitor researchprogram show that two-thirds of Canadians now rate climate change as a “veryserious” problem, up from 57 per cent last year 1. Worry is escalating because of a lackof government action and leadership.It was out of a similar concern regarding a lack of leadership on this issue that theIcarus Foundation was formed in February 2007 by six members of the tourismindustry with expertise in tourism, strategy and sustainability 2.The foundation was formed as a not-for-profit agency with a consulting divisionwhose mission is to be the catalyst that helps Canada become a climate friendlytourism destination. Its goals are to: 1. Educate destinations, industry associations, tourism suppliers and visitors about the overall contribution made by tourism to global warming and help reduce their individual and collective contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and use of fossil fuels; 2. Encourage the measurement, monitoring and reduction of the carbon footprint of Canada’s tourism industry and, thereby, contribute to the reduction of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions; 3. Advocate the vision of Canada as a genuine “carbon neutral” travel destination; 4. Help the Canadian tourism industry adapt to the impact of climate change on its operations; 5. Identify and promote examples of best practice within the tourism sector in Canada and communicate positive stories to visitors; 6. Become a recognized authority on all matters directly related to tourism and its contribution to climate change. intRoDUction 6
  7. 7. The foundation was named after a character in Greek mythology: Icarus, who,together with his father, Daedelus, crafted wings to escape an island prison.The father advised his son that escape could be achieved provided that Icarusflew neither too close the ocean where the weight of the water would drag himdown or too close to the sun where the heat would melt the wax on his wings. Itwas a call for the balance that distinguishes adolescent boys from mature men.Sadly, in the story, hubris and over confidence got the better of Icarus; he soaredhigh into the sky forgetting his father’s injunction and thus plunged to the oceandepths. The same fate need not befall the travel and tourism industry but only ifit listens to the advice of Daedelus to Icarus. Section of ‘The Lament for Icarus’ by Herbert James DraperThis discussion paper has been prepared to raise awareness of, and sensitivity to,the issues associated with climate change and the tourism sector in Canada bysummarizing our understanding of the salient facts and raising questions forconsideration by our peers in both the public and private sectors.The founders’ goal is to ensure that developing intelligent and practical responsesto climate change becomes a priority within the tourism community in Canada. intRoDUction 7
  8. 8. We are seeking like minds to join us in developing a rigorous, comprehensive top-down and bottom-up approach to addressing climate change in bold, new ways. We will circulate the paper throughout the entire Canadian travel industry via sector associations and destination marketing associations along with questions designed to tap into the creative intelligence of our vast sector. Based on that feedback, we will modify and enrich the document and re-circulate. The ultimate goal: a shared understanding of what must be done and a commitment to do it. In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. - George Orwell Each year the language of the scientific and professional community becomes more strident as it endeavors to raise political and public awareness of the need for action in the form of drastic cuts in the production of greenhouse gases. The completion of this draft of the paper coincided with the issue of the Inter- governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Synthesis report on November 17th, 2007 that summarized and revised the findings of its previous work. The opening statement is clear:“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level 3.” - IPCC, Synthesis report The Synthesis report was issued as a brief to policy makers planning to consider a new set of international commitments and agreements following the expiry of the Kyoto Protocol. The following reactions to the Fourth Assessment indicate the seriousness of the challenge4. “Soon will come a day when climate change escapes all control. We are on the verge of the irreversible. Faced with this emergency, the time is not for half measures. The time is for a revolution: a revolution of our awareness, a revolution of the economy, a revolution of political actions.” - Jacques Chirac, former French President “The new report gives us a stark warning that the potential impact will be more dramatic, faster and more drastic in terms of consequences than previously thought. This will change in some parts of the world the fundamental way in which we live.” - Achim Steiner, head of the UN Environmental programme (UNEP) “This report is a comprehensive and accurate reflection of the current state of climate change science.” - Sharon Hays, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, US “If the last IPCC report was a wake-up call, this one is a screaming siren. - Stephanie Tunmore, Greenpeace International. intRoDUction 8
  9. 9. W H At is c l i MAt e c HAnG e ?The Climate Change Challenge could be re-named the Carbon Challenge as it is caused by the build-up of carbondioxide and other particulates that prevent some of the sun’s warming rays from being reflected back out of earth’satmosphere. The burning of carbon-based fuels, notably wood, coal, and oil generates “greenhouse gases” – so-called because their dispersal throughout the upper atmosphere creates a layer that traps the heat from the sun closeto earth. Approximately 7 billion metric tons enters the atmosphere each year from human activity. Some of thatCO2 is absorbed by vegetation and soils that generate oxygen as a by-product; some is stored in the oceans, but notall. As a consequence, every year the concentration of CO2 and other green house gases increases and the heat fromthe sun’s rays is trapped within our atmosphere slowly increasing average global temperatures.Between 1970 and 2004, global emissions of CO2, CH4, In 2005, the concentration of carbon dioxide exceededN2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6 have increased by 70% to 49 the range that has existed over 650,000 years. Eleven ofGiga tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents such that the the warmest years since instrumental records have beencurrent concentration of greenhouse gases in the kept occurred during the last 12 years and thereforeatmosphere is equivalent to 430 parts per million by climate change is accelerating. In the 20th century, thevolume – expressed as 430 ppm CO2e. increase in average temperature was 0.74 degrees centigrade; sea level increased by 17 cm and a large partThe rate at which greenhouse gases are emitted is of the Northern hemisphere snow cover vanished 6.accelerating and, without mitigation, can be expected to Some regions are more vulnerable than others – thecontinue to increase as such populous, rapidly developing Arctic region, for example, is warming twice as fast asnations as China, India, Russia and Brazil embark on their the rest of the globe.own industrialization and while many developed countriesshow no sign of extinguishing their appetite for fossil fuels. The global warming of the past 100 or so years has already resulted in:Figure 1 CO2 Emissions and Concentrations A. More extreme weather patterns (too hot, cold, dry or wet for some); B. Less predictability C. Melting of ice in polar regions and the retreat of glaciers in alpine regions; D. Variable and unpredictable snowfall reductions in areas that have supported winter tourism activities (snowfall in the Alps has halved over past 30 years); E. Desertification (the world’s tropical forests areThe average temperature of the earth has increased by disappearing at the rate of 13 million hectares a year0.8 degrees Centigrade since the beginning of the – that is an amount equivalent to the size of Greece);industrial revolution (i.e. from 1860-2004). According F. Unusual flooding and increasing the National Academy of Sciences, the data suggeststhat the planet as a whole, is within 1 degree C of themaximum temperature experienced on the planet overthe past one million years5. WHAt is cliMAte cHAnGe? 9
  10. 10. Until relatively recently (the last 3-5 years), there was no sensitivity to changes in CO2 concentration; thescientific consensus that the planet was warming and synergistic impact of CO2 combined with other gases;that this increase in average temperature was caused by the effect of sea level rises, de-forestation and changinghuman activity. Now the evidence of warming is levels of freshwater absorbed in the ocean; and theindisputable although some still argue that its cause may extent to which the global community reduces itsbe more due to natural cycles than human activity. While emissions. While the ranges are wide, warming at somechanges in average temperature have occurred on several level is inevitable. Even if greenhouse gas emissions wereoccasions in the past, they took place over much longer to cease today, the inertia of the system is such thattime frames (from thousands to millions of years) giving warming will continue for several decades based on thespecies time to evolve and adapt. Meta changes are now gases already released and accumulating in theoccurring within decades. atmosphere and will increase average temperatures by 1.4 degrees C.The scientific community is unable to predict withabsolute certainty the precise level of future increases in Climate change may not always be gradual. Systematicaverage temperature. But the Intergovernmental Panel average temperature rises can increase the probability ofon Climate Change (IPCC) has suggests that continued crossing a critical threshold and triggering an abruptemissions will lead to a further warming of between 1.8 change in climate.and 4.0 Centigrade. Major events such as the collapse of the western AntarcticThe relatively wide range of the forecasts reflects the Ice Sheet; the melting of the Greenland ice sheet; theunknown relationship between various causative factors: shut-down of warm water currents such as the Gulfcontinued human use of fossil fuels, the climate’s own Stream; the destabilization of methane hydrates thatFigure 2 IPCC Projections of Average Temperature Increases WHAt is cliMAte cHAnGe? 10
  11. 11. “Evidence shows that the Earth’s climate system has sensitive thresholds, and if these are exceeded, the climate system can jump rapidly from one stable operating mode to a totally different one, just as the slowly increasing pressure of a finger eventually flips a switch and turns on a light” - US Academy of Sciences.exist below the continental shelf; and the declining changing climates and weather patterns. The earth isability of the biosphere to continue to absorb significant now recognized as a highly complex, adaptive, organicamounts of CO2 could individually, let alone in system with every system being connected to andcombination, trigger abrupt and meta changes that could affected by every other. Scientists do not know thepersist for centuries or millennia. For example, many precise nature of those inter-dependent relationships –scientists are concerned that the IPCC forecasts have not their scale, or direction and speed with which changesrecognized the speed with which the Greenland ice sheet can occur. We are entering an Age of Massive Uncertaintyis melting. and Volatility whereby seemingly small events can have huge and unpredictable consequences for the systems inFurthermore, current levels of scientific knowledge are which they occur.insufficient to predict the precise ways in which suchincreases in average temperature will be expressed inW H At M i G Ht HA p p e n i f t He eA Rt H co n t i n U es to WA R M ?The National Academy of Sciences concludes that global warming of a further 1 degree centigrade relative to 2000,will constitute “dangerous” climate change as a result of rising sea levels and extermination of species. The SternReview (a comprehensive examination of the economic costs of climate change conducted for the UK Government)states that at present rates of greenhouse gas accumulation “there is at least a 77% chance – and perhaps up to a 99%chance, depending on the climate model used – of a global average temperature rise exceeding 2 degrees C.The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on this planet, which, if it is exceeded, is consideredthat has been researching this phenomenon since the “dangerous”7. While the effects of such an increase wouldmid 1980s and that has become the primary source of not be experienced in equal measure across the planet,climate change data also considers the 2 degree figure a the overall impacts of such an increase would clearly bemajor threshold with the consequences for human life devastating for the global tourism sector: • Rising sea levels will flood large areas of land rendering them uninhabitable for humans. Given that the 30% of the world’s 6 billion people live within 100 km of an ocean and many more live on floodplains, the dislocation in humanitarian, social and economic terms will be enormous. • Rising sea levels will introduce salt into the natural water supply reducing the productive capacity of agricultural land long before it is flooded. Many small island states will experience partial if not total, catastrophic flooding due to rising sea levels and the increasing frequency of storms. WHAt MiGHt HAppen if tHe eARtH continUes to WARM? 11
  12. 12. • The glaciers that occur in mountain ranges (e.g., the Andes, Himalayas, Rockies) act as huge sponges soaking up and storing moisture that is released slowly to the plains below where much of humanity resides. Their melting and drying will result in a combination of flash flooding and extreme droughts. On September 24th, the Chairman of the IPCC told invitees to a UN Conference that the melting of glaciers could negatively impact some 500 million people in South Asia, 250 million people in China and between 75-250 million affected in Africa • Changing climatic patterns, combined with increased human activity, are destroying the habitats that support other forms of life. In many ecosystems, we do not even know what species we are losing, as mankind has yet to discover all known forms of life and their contributions to other species. 20-30% of all plant and animal species risk extinction if global average temperature exceeds 1.5-2.5 degrees centigrade. Many charismatic species at the top of their food chain and of greatest interest to international travelers such as lions, tigers, elephants, giraffes, bear, whales, primates, are already at risk from expanding cities, agriculture, mining, poaching etc. Climate change exacerbates the problem and speeds their extinction. • 95% of all coral reefs will die and Mediterranean, Baltic and US wetlands would suffer. The Amazon rainforest would suffer irreversible decline; China’s boreal forests, Canada’s low arctic tundra and the Russian Coastal tundra would face 70-80% losses. Even at today’s average temperature, half the coral in the Caribbean has disappeared and the great barrier Reef that supports a tourism industry generating some 4 billion dollars (Cdn $ equivalent) in value is under threat. • The number of people at risk of hunger would triple and 1.5-2.4 billion additional people would be at risk from water shortages, while an additional 275 million people would be exposed to health threats and 30 million additional people would be at risk from coastal flooding. For every 1 degree rise in the Tropics, crop yields there could decline by as much as 10% • The British economist, Sir Nicolas Stern has estimated that without drastic mitigation, i.e. if humanity proceeds on a “business as usual” basis, climate change will reduce welfare by an amount equivalent to a reduction in consumption per head of between 5 and 20%8. It is for this reason that Stern observes: “climate change is the greatest and widest-ranging market failure ever seen…Our actions over the coming few decades could create risks of major disruption to economic and social activity, later in this century and the next, on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and economic depression of the first half of the 20th Century”.It is not as if humanity cannot afford the costs of of stabilizing climate must be seen as an investment, themitigation and avoidance. The IPCC currently estimates price of which compares favorably to other investmentthat the cost to stabilize emissions and avoid the 2 degree decisions. Three percent of global GDP in 2007 equalsincrease in global average temperature will cost the $1.8 trillion – an amount only slightly higher than theworld less than 3% of the GDP in the year 2030. This $1.6 trillion spent by one country (the US) on the warmeans that the prosperity that we would normally with Afghanistan and Iraq9 and considerably lower thanachieve by 2030 may be postponed by a few months at the $22 trillion that the International Energy Authoritythe most. It is not a question of affordability but a believes is required to build the infrastructure necessaryquestion of priorities, vision and political will. The cost to cope with rises in global energy demand10. WHAt MiGHt HAppen if tHe eARtH continUes to WARM? 12
  13. 13. H oW like lY i s i t t H At s Uc H WA R M i nG W i l l o ccU R ?The plain and short answer is sadly: very likely. The IEA World Energy Outlook 200711 states that on current energytrends, CO2 emissions will increase 55% between 2004 and 2030. This means that, without strenuous and urgentmitigation actions over the next 20 years, we will be committing the planet to an average increase of between 0.5 and2.0 degrees centigrade relative to today by 2050 and possibly earlier. Given that the mid-point of that range creates“dangerous” conditions, it is not surprising that climate change has been described as the greatest threat to humanityin our history as a species.WHAt steps HAs tHe GloBAl coMMUnitY tAken to ADDRess tHe issUe?While parts of the global community have been talking about climate change since the late 1980s, the first majorinternational response to climate change was launched in 1992, at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, with thesigning of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The Convention established a long-term objective of stabilizing greenhouse concentrations in the atmosphere “at a level that would prevent dangerousanthropogenic interference with the climate system.” It also set a voluntary goal of reducing emissions from developedcounties to 1990 levels by 2000 – a goal that most countries did not meet.Because stronger action was clearly needed, the UNFCC met or are close to meeting their Kyoto targets. Thedeveloped the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. Recognizing that countries demonstrating the greatest reductions includea distinction should be made between developed nations, many Eastern European countries that have modernizedthat were contributing the lion’s share of emissions, and their power plants and industrial processes. By contrast,developing nations which were just starting to develop a number of major contributors to the problem have nottheir economies , the UNFCC identified some 38 12 made any progress. As of 2003, Canada had increasedcountries as party to the agreement. (They became its contribution by 32% over the target; Australia wasknown as Annex 1 parties). These 38 countries agreed to up 20%, the USA by 21%, New Zealand by 22%, andreduce their overall emissions by an average of 5.2% Japan 20%13.below 1992 levels between 2008 and 2012 with specifictargets varying from country to country. As of June 1972, Since the Kyoto Protocol, not only has the evidence for172 parties including Canada had signed and ratified the climate change strengthened, but public awareness ofKyoto Protocol thereby recognizing it as an international the challenge has also increased, thanks to the publicitytreaty. Two countries - Australia and USA - have signed generated by such people as Al Gore; and as a result ofbut declared that they will not ratify the Protocol. such climatic irregularities as Hurricane Katrina; the collapse of a part of Western Antarctica; and the rapidlyDespite the good intentions and achievements of many, melting Arctic Ice concentrations of CO2 continued to rise globally.Between 1997 and 2005, the amount of CO2 in the Since 1997, the UNFCC has held 12 major Conferencesatmosphere increased from 363 ppm to 384 ppm even of Parties (COPs) and numerous ad hoc working groupsthough 17 of 38 industrialized countries have already around the world. Work is now focussing on a new HoW likelY is it tHAt sUcH WARMinG Will occUR? 13
  14. 14. framework for the post 2012 period when the Kyoto base to a focus on preventing average temperaturesProtocol’s First Commitment period ends. A consensus rising above a dangerous level (i.e. 2 degrees centigradehas emerged that the world needs to focus less on above pre-industrial levels).percentage reduction targets on a constantly shiftingW H At Ac t i ons ne e D B e tAk en n oW ?The IPCC Synthesis report identifies a wide range of both adaptation and mitigation strategies that could be appliedto stabilize climate change. The report states: “There is high agreement and much evidence that all stabilization levelscan be achieved by deployment of a portfolio of technologies that are either currently available or expected to becommercialized in coming decades, assuming appropriate and effective incentives are in place for their development,acquisition, deployment and diffusion14.”Table SPM 6 on page 21 of the IPCC Synthesis Report That begs the question: what measures will be necessary toprovides a number of stabilization scenarios. It shows stabilize CO2 at those levels? The latest working group heldthat in order to maintian global average temperature in Vienna in August 2007, has concluded that Annex partiesincreases below a 2.4 degree ceiling, greenhouse gas would have to cut emissions by anything from 25-40% overconcentrations need to be kept between 445-490 ppmv. 2000 levels for there to be any impact on global concentrationsThis would require a peaking of CO2 emissions between of CO2. Furthermore countries like USA, CANADA,2000 and 2015 and then a reduction in further emissions Australia, Switzerland, Japan and Russia would have toby between 50-80% over 2000 levels. make similar cuts for these planetary goals to be achieved.cliMAte c HA nG e AnD toURi s M – t H e Glo B A l p i ct U R eAs one of the world’s largest, most rapidly growing and labor intensive industries capable of re-distributing wealthand helping to reduce poverty, tourism has much at stake. There are few activities other than agriculture that are asdependent on meteorology and climatology. The growth of mass tourism in the northern hemisphere was largely amigration towards locations with sunnier skies and warmer temperatures or where winter snowfall enabled wintersport activities that couldn’t be undertaken “back home”.Tourism’s future is inextricably interwoven and Since 1950, the number of international tourist trips hasdependent on the global response to climate change increased from 25 million to 800 million in 2007 andbecause, as the Secretary General of the UNWTO has this figure is expected to double by 2020. As thestated, “tourism is both a vector and a victim of the contribution made by tourism to the economies of bothclimate change phenomenon . ” 15 developed and developing countries is now universally recognized, it is important that the tourism sector playTourism has enjoyed mammoth growth since the its share in addressing the challenge posed by globalemergence of such mass modes of transportation as the climate change.jumbo jet and cruise ship after the Second World War. WHAt Actions neeD Be tAken noW? 14
  15. 15. Tourism as VictimThe scale and timing of these direct effects on tourism destinations have yet to be described and measured aroundthe world in detail. In October 2007, the UNWTO released the summary of a 200-page report titled Climate Changeand Tourism - responding to Global Challenges, compiled by a panel of experts chaired by Dr. Daniel Scott from theUniversity of Waterloo. That report endeavors to benchmark the current and potential impacts and place a measureon tourism’s contribution to the emission of greenhouse gases.The UNWTO report identifies three broad categories of direct impact affecting the competitiveness and sustainabilityof tourism destinations:1. Direct climatic impacts: Climate is a principal resource for tourism, determining both the suitability and appeal of locations for specific tourist activities and defining the season in which those activities can occur. Climate also has an important influence on operating costs such as heating or cooling, snowmaking, irrigation, food and water supply and insurance costs. As studies indicate that a shift of attractive climatic conditions for tourism towards higher latitudes and altitudes is very likely, some of Canada’s tourism sector might benefit from longer seasons, while others (notably winter destinations) might suffer from reduced and unpredictable snowfalls and wintry conditions. The IPCC has forecast that weather patterns are likely to become both more extreme and less predictable with more storm intensity, hotter days, more intense precipitation and more severe droughts in mid-latitude continental interiors. As a consequence, the tourism industry will face increased costs associated with the repair of infrastructure damage, emergency preparedness, insurance costs, backup water and power systems and business interruptions.2. Indirect Environmental Change Impacts: As climate is a major determinant of the characteristics of ecosystems, its rapid change will result in habitat change and loss. Changes in water availability, biodiversity loss, reduced landscape aesthetic, altered agricultural production, increased natural hazards, coastal erosion and flooding, damage to infrastructure and the increased incidence of vector-borne diseases will all impact tourism to varying diseases. Mountain, island, and coastal destinations are considered particularly sensitive to climate-induced environmental change, as are nature-based tourism market segments. Many of the species that Canada features in its tourism marketing (whales, otters, caribou, polar bears) are already endangered – rapid changes in their habitat increase the risk of their extinction. Habitat changes such as the warming of Canada’s boreal forest is encouraging the spread of new pests such as the pine beetle which, in addition to reducing valuable timber inventories, blights the landscape and aesthetics sought by visitors.3. Impacts of Mitigation Policies on Tourist Demand and Mobility: National and international mitigation policies such as carbon taxes and or mechanisms designed to internalize the external costs associated with the use of fossil fuels will result in increased costs to the consumer. This may lower demand overall and or shift travel patters (e.g., from one transport mode to another; or the origin mix may shift away from long-haul international sources to a greater reliance on domestic sources). WHAt Actions neeD Be tAken noW? 15
  16. 16. Tourism has enjoyed mammoth growth since the emergence of such mass modes of transportation as the jumbo jetand cruise ship after the Second World War. Since 1950, the number of international tourist trips has increased from25 million to 800 million in 2007 and this figure is expected to double by 2020. As the contribution made by tourismto the economies of both developed and developing countries is now universally recognized, it is important that thetourism sector play its share in addressing the challenge posed by global climate change.Energy CostsNow that the direct effects are beginning to become evident for all to see, we can anticipate an acceleration ofresearch into their nature and scope. But as many of the direct impacts are not likely to cause major upheaval formany years to come, there is a tendency to minimize the problem and delay response. The tourism sector has rarelybeen able to invest significant time and energy into long-term, strategic planning. Its perishable product necessitatesa shorter-term perspective. By focusing on the direct effects of climate change and ignoring the indirect effects, thetourism sector could fail to respond the biggest challenge to its future existence – a challenge that has been hastenedand exacerbated by tourism’s global success; a challenge that lies embedded – like a silent time bomb – in a host ofindirect effects that could undermine, jeopardize or, possibly, evaporate demand for international travel.The indirect effects of climate change are likely to be of greater danger in Canada than the direct effects. Six majorfactors are working synergistically and interdependently to impact the volume and nature of future tourismdemand:• energy prices,• disposable income and economic vitality,• security,• disease,• consumer/voter response to climatic events and effects, and• government response to all of the above.Each of these factors is affected by climate change to varying degrees. The problem is that all these factors areinextricably inter-woven in a myriad of ways that few appreciate. They form a complex system that is in a constantstate of flux adapting to internal events and external stimuli and no one fully understands the nature of the inter-dependencies. Despite its apparent resiliency, tourism is built on a foundation that could possibly be as unsinkableas the Titanic and as impregnable as the World Trade Centre. These six forces can either stimulate or slow down andreduce tourism demand. Virtually every destination in Canada has some form of growth strategy based on forecastsof demand growth that may be totally overestimated if these six forces combine synergistically. It is in the bestinterests of all tourism leaders to better understand how these factors can affect both the volume and characteristicsof tourism demand.Tourism is one of the few industries that must move its consumer to the point of consumption. Whether visitorsarrive by car, train, bus or plane, the act of “getting there” uses large quantities of fossil fuel and, until recently, mosttransport modes relied on oil or kerosene-based combustion engines. Tourism, like most industries in westerneconomies has enjoyed nearly 60 years of year-on-year growth thanks to the availability of relatively cheap energy WHAt Actions neeD Be tAken noW? 16
  17. 17. and, notably the availability of cheap oil. But there is now strong evidence that the era of cheap energy is coming toa close. While the topic of “peak oil” is still as contentious and subject to fierce debate and while there is no proof asto exactly when production of existing reserves will peak, oil prices are continuing to rise. The US GovernmentAccountability Office has advised the government to prepare for this reality and a growing number of oil executivesare now willing to discuss the subject16. In September of this year, the President of Statoil declared, “Production ofconventional oil in OECD countries will peak as soon as in 2010, increasing the world’s dependence on the OPEC carteland Russia, and continuing the rush to non-conventional deposits such as Alberta’s oil sands17. ”The BP Statistical Review of World Energy stated, “It’s no secret anymore that for every nine barrels of oil we consume,we are only discovering one.”In the World Energy Outlook 2007 report published by Figure 3 Rise in Energy Pricesthe normally confident International Energy Authority,the authors state: “World oil resources are judged to besufficient to meet the projected growth in demand to 2030on the assumption that the necessary investment isforthcoming…Although new oil-production capacityadditions from Greenfield projects are expected to increaseover the next five years, it is very uncertain whether theywill be sufficient to compensate for the decline in outputat existing fields and keep pace with the projected increasein demand. A supply side crunch in the period to 2015,involving an abrupt escalation in oil prices, cannot beruled out18.”In November 2007, crude oil prices exceeded $99.00 per barrel – a figure over three times that experienced in the 1990’s.The unknown as far as tourism is concerned relates to whether the upward price trend of the past few quarters willcontinue and combine with the imposition of climate change mitigation measures to generate a real increase in the cost oftravel. If it does, it will represent a complete reversal of a dominant trend since the Second World War – while once seenas a luxury enjoyed by the few, international travel is now considered a right and treated as a commodity by the majority.Global tourism and aviation demand is directly related to GDP. The Boston Consulting Group report that growthrates for airline demand are generally between 1.5 and 2.0 times GDP growth19. A steady increase in average globaltemperatures is guaranteed to increase mitigation and adaptation costs that, in combination with higher energy/fuelprices, may, sooner or later, slow down economic growth and, in turn, put a break on annual increases in demand forleisure tourism.Thus far global demand for travel has shown considerable elasticity when it comes to oil prices but there is noguarantee that such apparent elasticity might not find its breaking point when combined with increased costs ofborrowing, and consumer price increases. While the trajectory of price increases may slow or flatten, the market is alsohighly vulnerable to unpredictable “exogenous” events such as damage to supply lines (breaks in pipelines), reducedrefinery capacity (as occurred after Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast east of New Orleans) or war and terrorism. WHAt Actions neeD Be tAken noW? 17
  18. 18. Disposable IncomeThe second driver of tourism growth has been increases in disposable income enabled by real gains in productivityand earning power, reductions in the real cost of many household items (including travel – see above) and thegrowing availability of credit. Global income (GDP per capita) has virtually trebled since 1970. But in many westerneconomies, an aging population may also diminish average disposable income – Japan’s currently poor economicperformance is largely attributed to it aging population.Of the western economies going forward, the US and UK are most vulnerable with respect to future credit restrictions.Household debt as a percentage of household income is rising in the UK, Japan and the US – all major sources ofoutbound travel. In the US, consumer debt exceeds $2.46 trillion. The outstanding debt of the UK household sectormoved above £1,354 billion in 2004, equivalent to around 145% - 163% of household income20. Should deflationoccur in the form of higher interest rates and or a drop in home equity or both, travel could suffer while householdsadjust to increased debt possibly combined with reduced real incomes. While none of the above will be “caused” byclimate change, it is the effect of climate change on a global economy that could have both knock on and triggeringeffects that reduce travel demand.In the developing economies of such countries as Brazil, Russia, India, China, Eastern Europe and other expandingeconomies in Latin America and Asia, international, outbound travel demand is at a much earlier, embryonic stageof development and growth. But with youth comes a degree of vulnerability to climate-related hazards, drought, andwidespread adaptation and mitigation expenditure. In both developed and developing economies, increases inenergy costs combined with rising adaptation costs may generate a “knock-on effect” on GDP and lower demand fortravel. What we simply do not know is, how much and when?SecurityTravel depends on the “free movement of people” across international borders. Tourists, particularly internationaltourists, are averse to political instability and social unrest. Global or regional political conflicts, terrorism and warcan dry up tourism demand in affected regions overnight. Security risks increase where job and income prospectsare poor and are exacerbated in the absence of sufficient food and water. Climate change will result in increasingincidences of drought, flooding, destruction of homes and livelihoods as well as food price increases and foodshortages all of which can fuel non-peaceful responses in politically charged, economically distressed areas. A reportissued in 2007 by the Virginia-based, national security think-tank The CNA Corporation21 was written by six retiredUS admirals and five retired generals. It warned that in the next 30 to 40 years there will be wars over water, increasedhunger, instability from worsening disease and rising sea levels and global warming-induced refugees. It furtherpredicted that “The chaos that results can be an incubator of civil strife, genocide and the growth of terrorism”.The Generals, used to thinking strategically, highlight the interdependencies that multiply impacts of the increase inglobal temperatures. WHAt Actions neeD Be tAken noW? 18
  19. 19. “Unlike most conventional security threats that involved a single entity acting in specific ways and points in time,climate change has the potential to result in multiple chronic conditions, occurring globally within the same time frame.Economic and environmental conditions in already fragile areas will further erode as food production declines, diseasesincrease, clean water becomes increasingly scarce, and large populations move in search of resources. Weakened andfailing governments, with an already thin margin for survival, foster the conditions for internal conflicts, extremismand movement toward increased authoritarianism and radical ideologies22”.Between 2000 and 2005, the number of overseas visitors to the US dipped from 26 million annually to 21 million,according to the Travel Industry Association of America which cited visitor concerns about border crossings andvisa delays. Federal concerns about terrorism, that may increase as a result of either food or job shortages caused byclimate change, are encouraging legislation that will inflict further travel restrictions. A revamped border-securityprogram that screens all people who enter and leave the United States, creates a terrorism risk profile of eachindividual and retains that information for up to 40 years, is being considered by Homeland Security23.Consumer / Voter / Investor response to Climate Change and Awarenessof Environmental VulnerabilitiesConcern about climate change has led some consumers and their influencers to single out long haul travel as anactivity with too high a carbon cost to be justified. Princes, journalists, archbishops and think tanks24 have describedtravel as an indulgence, as a sin and as requiring a health warning. At the recent international conference on tourismand climate change held by the UNWTO, significant concern was expressed by tourism industry leaders regardingthe “demonization of travel” in the western media. While it is too early to tell whether such views are likely to be heldand acted upon by a majority, the potential for voluntary changes in behavior, independent of any imposed additionalcosts, does exist and needs to be monitored closely.In April 2007, the online travel community, TripAdvisor, surveyed 1000 travelers worldwide. 38% said thatenvironmentally friendly tourism is a consideration when travelling. 38% had stayed at an environmentally-friendlyhotel and 9% specifically seek out such hotels. 34% are willing to pay more to stay in environmentally friendly hotels.Perhaps of greater long-term concern to the travel industry was the finding that 24% believe air travel should beavoided. Research conducted by members of the Icarus Foundation (Dodds & Leung, 2007)25 suggests that 25%expect travel agents to provide information on climate change and carbon offsetting options. According to the latesttravelhorizons survey undertaken by the Travel Industry Association of America (TIA) also released in April of200726, more than half of all US adults say they would be more likely to select an airline, rental car or hotel that usesmore environmentally friendly products and processes. But while 50% of US adults may be advocates forenvironmental responsibility, only 14% said their actual selection of a supplier would be influenced by the supplier’sefforts to preserve the environment. Just 13% would be willing to pay more to use green products – although fully56% said they might. The amount or rate of the fare premium seems to be the source of their hesitation: 76% wouldpay less than a 10% more per usage with the majority indicating they would pay less than 5% more. WHAt Actions neeD Be tAken noW? 19
  20. 20. Government Response to the AboveAs indicated at the outset of this discussion paper, the public mood for action to mitigate the threats associated withglobal warming is on the rise and politicians in all countries are now recognizing that new policies and fiscalinstruments are required to incentivize adaptation and mitigation.The core response will likely revolve around the need to internalize the cost associated with emitting greenhousegases and to place a market value on carbon either through a cap and trade system such as Europe’s EmissionTrading Scheme (ETS) or through the applications of a carbon tax imposed upstream in the energy supply chain tocover the social cost of emitting C02. In either case, these government imposed attempts at internalizing the externalcost of pollution will inevitably be passed onto consumers in the form of higher prices. Whether such prices increasesare sufficient to dampen demand for travel remains to be seen.In summary, these six indirect factors combined with the challenge of a rapidly changing climate have the potentialto negatively affect the long-term demand for tourism to Canada. Most forecasts for the growth in demand toCanada’s destinations that underpin current marketing strategies are based on demand forecasts such as thosegenerated by the UNWTO that do not acknowledged their vulnerability to such forces.Tourism as Contributor to the ProblemAs a global phenomenon involving the movement of over 800 million people across international boundaries every year,tourism cannot deny its contribution to the problem of greenhouse gas production. At the Second International Conferenceon Climate Change and Tourism held in Davos in October, 2007, the UNWTO provided the first overall estimate oftourism’s carbon foot print. In 2004, the report authors estimated that the global tourism industry (including domestictravel) generated some 1,300 mega tons of CO2e, an amount that represents 5% of the emissions generated globally.As illustrated here, the lion’s share of tourism emissions (75%) is Figure 4 Global Tourism Emissions - UNWTOassociated with the act of transporting the visitor from origin todestination. Aviation alone accounted for 40% of the total tourismfootprint in 2005 and this share will increase in both absolute andrelative terms to reflect the projected growth in travel by air.According to the UNWTO report, emissions can vary greatly pertourist trip – between a few kilograms of CO2 for a local journeyby rail up to 9 tons of CO2 for long-distance, cruise-basedjourneys. While long-haul travel by air represents only 2.7% of all Source: Climate Change and Tourism, UNWTO, 2007tourist trips, it contributes 17% of global tourism-related CO2emissions. In contrast, trips by coach and rail account for 34%of all trips, but contribute only 13% of all carbon dioxide emissions. WHAt Actions neeD Be tAken noW? 20
  21. 21. Tourism’s contribution to climate change has received considerable attention from the press and environmentalists forseveral reasons:1. Leisure travel (especially long-haul vacation travel that generates a disproportionate share of emissions) is perceived as a discretionary activity that could easily be reduced by decreasing the number of trips made. Forgoing one annual vacation, when many affluent consumers in developed countries take more, is perceived as a more impactful act than simply changing light bulbs. International air travel is an activity undertaken by a relatively wealthy minority – less than 3% of the world’s population currently undertakes long-haul trips by air.2. There is concern that the true impact of aviation has been understated in the past as the impact of other noxious gases such as Nitrous Oxide (N2O) and other halocarbons generated by aircraft have not been included in the aviation figure. Such gases are far more potent contributors to global warming than carbon dioxide and it has been suggested that a multiplier of as much as 2.7 should be applied to the figure of 517 million metric tons. If this multiplier were applied, then the tourism contribution to global warming would approximate 8.2% of total CO2 emitted globally in 2005. Given that tourism is expected to double between 2005 and 2020 then tourism’s contribution could be as high as 16% and possibly more if other sectors achieve their reduction targets. Scientists are also currently studying whether the fact that aircraft emissions occur at high altitude could necessitate increasing that multiplier. The extent of the greenhouse effect caused by vapor trails that create cirrus clouds at high altitude is also being investigated.3. The proportion of greenhouse gases caused by air travel will continue to rise significantly and relative to other sectors within tourism and the economy as a whole. This is for two reasons: firstly, globalization, economic growth and consumer demand are causing air travel to grow between 1.5 and 2.0 times global GDP growth. These are global averages – in the rapidly developing countries such as India, China, Brazil, etc. air traffic is growing at much faster rates; and secondly, the opportunities to replace fossil fuels remain limited. While gains in fuel- burn efficiency are occurring and more fuel efficient aircraft are being introduced, they do not compensate for the growth in demand. Aircraft enjoy a long operating life and when companies and countries acquire more efficient models, the older aircraft are not extracted from the supply chain, but are cascaded to airlines in developing countries where they continue to contribute to the global warning problem as their industries expand.W H At is t He c A nA D i A n toU R i s M i n D U s t RY D o i n G W i t H R es p ect tocliMAte c HA nG e ?The Icarus Foundation was formed in February of 2007 to raise awareness of the impacts of climate change on tourismand to encourage the Canadian tourism industry to take responsibility for reducing its contribution to this problem.Its founders, experienced practitioners and active participants While the term “sustainable tourism” is used frequently,in the tourism sector, believed that while many individuals the term had not been assigned any form of quantifiablewere both concerned and active, the Canadian tourism measure so that progress towards sustainability could beindustry as a whole was slow a.) to recognize the importance monitored. Furthermore, the contradictory and practicalof climate change on its future and b.) to consider the role implications of growing tourism at a compound annualthat tourism needed to play in addressing the problem. WHAt is cAnADiAn toURisM DoinG WitH Respect to cliMAte cHAnGe? 21
  22. 22. rate of between 3-6% while relying on fossil fuel, notably about climate change although most provincial and nationaloil, to transport visitors to and within Canada have not sector associations were talking up “sustainability.” Tenbeen overtly and widely recognized. of the 18 sector associations considered themselves to be inadequately informed to develop an internal policy;In the summer of 2007, the Icarus Foundation undertook and the most frequent responses to the open-endedan informal survey of over 30 industry leaders (deputy question “what other factors currently limit or preventministers of provincial ministries with a tourism your organization from taking action in response toportfolio, presidents of provincial and city-based climate change?” focused on lack of information; themarketing agencies and leaders of several tourism- need for education, the lack of leadership andrelated associations). coordination. None of the interviewees had developed an internal carbon neutral procurement policy nor hadWe discovered that, while most interviewees did consider begun to develop a mitigation strategy. In short, while itclimate change to be an important issue (scoring an average appears that the topic of climate change has moved fromrating of 7.5 on a scale of 1-10), there was less clarity and cool to hot, many of the persons interviewed for thisconsensus about where to start addressing the issue and what study remained unclear as to what to do. Relatively few were doing very much specificallyW H At sH oUl D t He c AnA D i A n to U R i s M i n D U s t RY D o ?The travel and tourism sectors are vital contributors to the global economy and play a significant role in Canada’seconomy employing 634,700 people, contributing $15.3 billion in taxes and generating $66.9 billion in revenuesfrom international visitors and domestic travelers27. Yet this economic value is at risk due to the, as yet, unknownshort and long term effects of a changing climate.The success of Canada’s tourism sector at both the macro applied to both measuring and internalizing the costsand micro level has been due to virtually free access to associated with this sector.natural resources such as pristine landscapes, a diversityof wildlife, clean water, and relatively cheap energy. We believe that tourism can make a positive contributionWhile tourism may enjoy a greener image than heavy to the economic and social well-being of Canadiansindustry and mineral extraction, its environmental provided that a more rigorous cost-benefit analysis beimpacts are not insignificant. The development of undertaken and every effort made to reduce the carbontourism-related infrastructure, such as airports, access footprint generated by the tourism sector as a whole.roads, resorts, and accommodation, results in The threat of climate change on the future sustainabilitymodifications to the natural environment and generates of a healthy tourism sector should be sufficient toexternal costs that are not reflected on corporate balance encourage the entire tourism industry to work togethersheets or national accounts. International visitors place to reduce its carbon footprint and live in harmony withextra demands on finite energy and water resources and the environment that supports it. Furthermore, anygenerate polluting waste products that are absorbed into effort made to reduce a dependency on the limited fossilthe atmosphere, our water systems and landfills. While fuels that contribute to global warming will result inthe positive economic impact of tourism has been significant cost savings that can only increase over timemeasured and communicated, little effort has been as energy prices escalate. WHAt is cAnADiAn toURisM DoinG WitH Respect to cliMAte cHAnGe? 22
  23. 23. The focus now must be on “net” benefit and our attention unambiguous nature of the threat is real. It can bedrawn to the true environmental impact of tourism as it measured. Targets can be set and progress currently practiced throughout the tourism supply Effective responses will involve collaboratively developingchain. Canadians have led the world in the development a complex range of fiscal, regulatory, cultural andof economic impact models – it is now time to refine behavioral mechanisms that, if applied, would take us athose models to reflect the use of Canada’s natural long way down the road to some form of sustainability.resources (climate, air, water, wildlife and landscape). In other words, the better and more robust are our responses to climate change, the more likely we are toClimate change provides us with an opportunity to see a truly sustainable tourism sector emerge.generate tangible and truly sustainable solutions to whatis, in reality, an even broader environmental, social and The strategic action options open to Canada’s tourismpolitical challenge. The immediacy, urgency and industry with respect to climate change are as follows:1. Measure: we need to measure and monitor the ecological footprint of Canada’s tourism industry in terms of the environmental services/resources consumed as well as the waste products generated in the act of developing and delivering Canada’s tourism product, services and experiences. Such an assessment should be rigorous, honest and comprehensive. It should take into account the total cost of construction as well as operating costs. Note: the production of concrete, cement and asphalt for buildings and roads also generates significant emissions. The urbanization of natural lands for resort, leisure and recreation purposes also diminishes the capacity of the earth to absorb carbon and, thereby, accelerates the warming effect.2. Develop Awareness and Understanding of the Issue and its Impacts: while recognition of the scale of the challenge is improving, it has not yet proved sufficient to cause tourism leadership to act decisively and boldly. The federal government refuses to sign up to Kyoto, preferring a “made in” Canada solution which appears to mirror the US Government’s search for a technological silver bullet,” and Industry Canada has remained silent on the climate change and tourism issue. In recent weeks, several provincial ministries with responsibility for tourism, notably Ontario and British Columbia have held symposia on the subject. TIAC has also commissioned a Sustainability Tool Kit for tourism operators although this was not identified specifically as a mechanism for reducing carbon emissions. The Icarus Foundation urges the federal and provincial agencies responsible for tourism and the environment to work together to generate and distribute compelling communications that inform all members of the tourism supply chain of the threat posed by climate change and recommend specific and practical action steps towards mitigation.3. Commit to Carbon Reduction and Risk Mitigation: the most recent IPCC report, along with the Stern Report and others, all stress that the sooner action is taken, the less the likelihood that the 2 degree threshold will be exceeded and the less the cost of mitigation. Global emissions will need to stabilize no later than 2015 and be reduced well below half of 2000 levels if we are to prevent average temperatures rises beyond the 2 degree threshold. The Icarus Foundation believes that, if tourism wishes to be perceived as a mature, responsible sector, it must play its part in reducing its footprint as much as is technically possible. The authors of the UNWTO report Climate Change and Tourism developed several mitigation scenarios based on a “business as usual” scenario of continued growth at 4% per annum as forecast by the WTO. The most effective mitigation projection was based on a possible (but not probable) 36% efficiency gain due to improved technologies combined with a 43% reduction generated WHAt sHoUlD tHe cAnADiAn toURist inDUstRY Do? 23
  24. 24. by a shift of transport usage from aviation to ground modes and from long-haul to short-haul trips. But when growth was factored in, these bold measures only achieved a 16% reduction overall of emissions from the tourism sector – far short of the 50-80% target called for by the IPCC and the United Nations. It is important to note that these potential savings represent idealistic computer modeling not likely reality. In many cases, the switch from air to ground is neither feasible nor acceptable in today’s economy (consumers value their time too much) and having become accustomed to enjoying the right to explore the world, there is no evidence that the majority of consumers will to stay at home by choice. We recognize that global tourism flows have a wealth redistribution effect, alleviating poverty in developing parts of the world and contributing to the achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. We do not, therefore, urge Canadians to stay at home and withdraw the benefits from foreign exchange and economic development that occur in receiving countries. In keeping with the principles of “contraction and convergence”, however, we argue that the way we look at the growth of inbound tourism needs to be fundamentally re-examined. We believe that a “business as usual” scenario is unacceptable and harmful to the image of the sector within Canada as well as our international image and brand. Reducing our dependency on fossil fuels will result in cost savings, the significance and value of which are expected to rise over time as energy prices rise. A focus on quality and environmental stewardship will also develop further income generating opportunities for many of Canada’s tourism suppliers located in rural/wilderness locations. The Icarus Foundation recommends that each province establish a Climate Change Action group comprising representatives from the provincial Ministry with a tourism mandate, the agency responsible for tourism marketing, the tourism industry advocacy group and the provincial ministry with an environment mandate to develop a province wide mitigation strategy for tourism in each province. Ideally such groups would form an inter-provincial council to share information, case studies and best practice and would be mirrored by a national working group with a similar composition.4. Exercise Rigor, Courage and Creativity: we believe that it is vital that destinations re-visit growth targets in light of the potential for a down turn in demand caused by internalizing the cost of carbon and other externalities; rising energy prices; skilled labor shortages; possible taxation; shifts in consumer behavior and decreases in disposable income. We believe the time has come to re-frame our concept of tourism growth in qualitative, revenue terms by focusing on increased net value to guests, existing host suppliers and the host community. A failure to pay the true costs of environmental services, together with mass transportation methods and the transparency of the Internet have combined to systematically commoditize tourism and diminish prices and margins. Despite growth in total visitor numbers, many tourism operators watch their slim margins diminishing further. For some, the only way to generate a return to shareholders is to grow through expansion and acquisition. Excessive discounting as a response to past crises combined with a fixation on price, as opposed to value, has also created little room for maneuver. The real cost of both leisure and business travel (in terms of a percentage of WHAt sHoUlD tHe cAnADiAn toURist inDUstRY Do? 24
  25. 25. disposable income) has actually decreased over time. In fact much of the growth in demand has been generated by making travel financially accessible to a larger share of the population – people travel because they can afford to do so. But if the cost of that travel does not take into account the “externalities” associated with using the environment as a form of free garbage dump and if excessive discounting and price-based competition undermines the viability of many tourism enterprises, the end result is instability and short-termism. Truly innovative, bold thinking and action is required to find ways to substantially increase the value of the Canadian tourism experience and position Canada as a destination worth paying a premium for. By obsessing about quality and environmental stewardship and by positioning Canada as a “limited green edition”, we have the opportunity over time to increase the net value and price of a Canadian experience and improve the viability and profitability of existing businesses. There is a growing market of environmentally conscious and concerned consumers who are willing to pay premium rates for authentically, “green”, organic and environmentally responsible goods and services28. By focusing on growing the profit of existing suppliers as opposed to increasing capacity and competition, we will develop a resilient sector better able to withstand external shocks.5. Undertake Further Consumer Research: the Canadian Tourist Commission (CTC) has invested heavily in re- branding Canada and undertaken innovative values-based research to identify the profile of travelers most likely to be attracted to Canada based on their Explorer Quotient. Visitors to are invited to take a survey that determines their EQ profile so that packages and experiences tailored to their known preferences and behavior can be offered. As this research represents a breakthrough in customer profiling, it also represents an opportunity to identify which profiles are likely to respond most positively to green / responsibility messages. The Icarus Foundation will explore with the CTC the potential to add questions related to environmental attitudes and purchasing sensitivities in order to assist Canada in capturing a greater share of the environmentally conscious traveler.6. Help the Industry Adapt: there is evidence that many parts of Canada’s tourism industry may benefit in the short run from the warming trend as southerly latitudes experience unbearably high summer temperatures and water shortages, they may be attracted to a cooler, greener northern destination such as Canada. Canada also has a vast area within the Arctic Circle and many tourists are keen to experience it before it is irreversibly changed. Other parts of the industry will need to adapt to less favorable patterns: wine tourism may suffer from water shortages; many destinations reliant on skiing and other winter activities may see their seasons shortened or collapse; operators reliant on wildlife viewing may find it necessary to cut back operations in order to protect vulnerable species. The Icarus Foundation recommends that the Climate Change Action Groups identified in point 4 above be mandated to identify those aspects of the tourism industry most likely to be negatively affected by climate change and coordinate adaption programs necessary to minimize economic, social and environmental impacts.7. Encourage Responsible Procurement: Domestic and internal business travel is a direct contributor to the economic viability of many tourism businesses as the business traveler has been able and willing to pay premium prices. Growing numbers of public and private companies are developing corporate responsibility initiatives in response to investor and shareholder pressure and are examining their travel procurement practices in this context. In the United Kingdom, Project ICARUS29 was initially established to promote carbon reduction in travel management programs throughout the UK business travel industry. The project is led by, and targeted primarily at, travel buyers/managers and provides specific WHAt sHoUlD tHe cAnADiAn toURist inDUstRY Do? 25
  26. 26. guidelines on responsible travel procurement as well as broader sustainability and duty of care issues. The intention of ICARUS in the first instance is to drive the UK travel industry to reduce carbon emissions in line with government targets. The initial goals of the project are to create: a toolkit for buyers to use to implement a Carbon Reduction System; a system of accreditation to recognize buyers who implement the toolkit and have success in reducing carbon emissions; and a system of awards to recognize suppliers who demonstrate leadership and innovation in making their products more environmentally friendly. The Icarus Foundation has commenced discussions with representatives of the UK Icarus Project with a view to adapting their toolkit to the needs of the business community in Canada.coU lD tH e toUR i sM i nD UstRY Act A s A l eA D cH A n Ge AGen t ?Despite a late start, the opportunity for Canada to take a leadership position in the minds of green consumers is not entirelylost. It is vital, however, that Canada protects its brand and does not miss the opportunity to attract high yielding,environmentally conscious travelers. Canada’s dependence on resource extraction combined with its high per capitaenergy consumption and urbanization clashes with images of a pristine wilderness. Over the coming years, we canexpect increased media attention on our environmental track record in the oil patch and the Arctic. Furthermore,the notion of addressing climate change merely to achieve competitive advantage in the tourism market is notadvisable given the magnitude of the global challenge and the increasing scrutiny to which each country is subject.Despite these limitations, the Canadian tourism sector In this context, the Icarus Foundation challenges thecould step forward and show leadership within Canada Canadian tourism industry to step forward and assumeby positioning itself as stewards of the natural world that it the leadership role that the country needs and deserves.has used so effectively to attract visitors. Canada could enjoy The first step is to express your concern and providethe same levels of international recognition and respect it Icarus with your input to this paper and creative ideasgained as peacekeepers, if it were it to make a deep for moving towards a solution.commitment to developing a robust, resilient low carboneconomy based upon living in harmony with the environment. Finally, we will let the Chairman of the IPCC, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri have the last word. In his presentation to the“Far sighted action by the $800 billion international tourism United nations in September 2007, he quoted Mahatma industry will send important signals to governments, Gandhi who once said, “A technological society has two industries and the public that mitigation and adaptation choices: first it can wait until catastrophic failures expose to the climate change challenge make economic and any system deficiencies, distortions and self deceptions. environmental sense. It is the kind of leadership that can Secondly, a culture can provide social checks and balances to encourage others to look not only to their explore and to correct for systemic distortion prior to catastrophic failures”. the risks posed by climate change, but also the abundant opportunities and benefits of a cost effective action.” - In Mr. Pachauri’s estimation, the time had come for Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary General and UNEP humanity to move away from self-deception and opt for Executive Director. the second choice. We at the Icarus Foundation agree and invite you to help grow a community committed toIf there was ever a problem that required collective, moving beyond denial to action.collaborative action within committed communities, itis climate change. Given that tourism is about helpingpeople meet and engage with each other and experiencingrenewal, why shouldn’t tourism be the lead change agent? coUlD tHe toURisM inDUstRY Act As A leAD cHAnGe AGent? 26
  27. 27. enDnotes1. Globescan survey described in, Sept 05, 20072. See: and our blog www.icarusfoundation.typepad.com3. Summary for Policymakers of the Synthesis Report of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. 16 November 20074. Source: Article dated 2 February, 20075. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, September, 20066. Speech made by Mr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to the UN, September 24, 2007.7. See: for copies of their reports8. Stern review: the Economics of Climate Change.9. According to a report published Democrats on Congress’Joint Economic Committee, the economic costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are estimated to total $1.6 trillion for the period between 2002 and 2008 and could rise to $3.5 trillion between 2003 and 2017. Source: Associated press, November 13th, 2007.10. Executive Summary, World Energy Outlook, 2007, International Energy Authority. See www.iae.com11. ibid12. For a complete list of countries and their participation, see: Protocol_signatories13. ibid14. IPCC Synthesis report15. “Climate Change – Reality Check and Opportunity for Tourism ” , and Tourism Development and Climate Change: Understanding, Anticipating, Adapting, Participating in the Common Effort, two policy papers published by Francesco Frangialli, UNWTO Secretary-General, 2007 – see www.unwto.org16. US Government Accountability Office, Uncertainty about Future Oil Supply Makes It Important to Develop a Strategy for Addressing a Peak, February 200717. f49d8f2c15d5&k=2559718. Note earlier in this report, the necessary infrastructure was stated as requiring and investment of over $22 trillion in global demand for oil was to be met.19. Understanding the Demand For Air Travel, Focus, June 2006, Boston Consulting Group: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that has been researching this phenomenon since the mid 1980s and has become the primary source of climate change data also assesses a 2 degree increase as “dangerous” enDnotes 27
  28. 28. 20. ibid23. Hearings are currently taking place in Washington on the Homeland Security’s Secure Flight Program - http:// Quotes here…25. Dodds, R, & Leung, M (2007) “Climate Change And Carbon Offsetting In The Travel And Tourism Industry” 5th Bi-Annual Symposium of Consumer Psychology of Tourism, Hospitality and Leisure, June, 2007, Charleston, SC.26. Source: Tourism Industry Association of Canada: See which describes the growing market of consumers interested in Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability.29. See: enDnotes 28